Posts from Mafia: general discussions.

1. I'm used to thinking, not just talking about anything. In a blind game, there are fewer facts and more chatter.

What's that supposed to mean? Don't confuse the classic version with the full version; there are actually a lot of facts in the latter, and there's less role-playing fluff, meaning you have to think more.
In the classic version, yes, there are reveals and false reveals, so there's always something to think about. But in the full version, reveals are forbidden. How can you figure out who's who just by chatting? Only by analyzing the newspaper and your own notes.

Added 3 minutes ago

2. At night, you should think about the day's results and make decisions. Nighttime chatter gets in the way of that.

Even if the night lasts only half an hour or an hour, as in the classic version, you still have time to think about the day's results and make a decision about your role (if you've been assigned one).
In the full version, the game limit is either 48 hours or 24 (day 48 and night 48).
You can limit the number of notes, and only the latest version of the notes is accepted, so the GM doesn't have to rewrite the newspaper every half hour. Then, it's announced that the night is over, and the newspaper is announced, which will be released after some time (as the GM can manage).
After the newspaper, the day is announced. I don't see any problems.

Added 2 minutes ago

3. I filled out my profile once and haven't changed it in 25 games. But it seems like you have to come up with new characters every time... However, if the GM is going to post them and you just have to choose, then maybe I'll give it a try.

Well, TOX has created a system for fictional characters; you don't have to worry about coming up with them. You can just provide a list of actors depending on the number of players.
If you don't like the GM's actors, you can create musical instruments, generals, directors, presidents, kings, cooks, songs, poets—
anything for which there is reliable Russian-language information.

Added 4 minutes ago

I can say the same about you.;) You don't want to sleep at night. You're not happy with the clues on the profile. And so on. You're used to characters, blind games, sleepwalking...

I don't care; I have plenty of places to play without HV. You can play however you like. I won't offer anything else. I've made a suggestion; if you don't want it, that's fine. But to say that it's so difficult, at the very least, is unclear. It's not difficult to sift through tons of pages to find the right voices, but it's difficult to go to the next topic and see all the voices that are right there. And by the way, any vote can say a lot.

No, that's a separate issue – it's about clutter.

Why, Tox? If the topic is the same for all games, then IMHO it doesn't clutter anything. However, personally, I don't care (I always reread the game topic anyway), but IMHO it would be more convenient for the GM to count votes in a separate topic.

No, everything is correct, there is no clogging. And yes, it's up to the GM to decide. But from my point of view, counting votes is far from being the most difficult part of a GM's job, and I don't quite understand why it's necessary to optimize it specifically. But if it were possible to reduce the time spent writing newspapers... then yes. Well, actually, all these new ideas regarding clues will reduce that, so everything is fine.

Here's an example of a voting round analysis from one game: -------------------------------------------------- So, a mini-analysis of the voting. Amazon votes for Elenka... it doesn't matter, the vote will be changed. Knight votes for Drakkar. Mahasamatman votes for Elenka. Puss votes for Bagler. Amazon votes for Dee. 1 vote for Drakkar, 1 for Bagler, 1 for Dee (we're talking about the main votes for now). Weiss - Parker. Woodson - Witch. Nezhka - Drakkar. Blank - Drakkar. Ronin - Bagler. Trium - Bagler. Cactus - Dee. Gudamova - Bagler. ... Drakkar - 3, Bagler - 4, Dee - 2. I voted for Bagler mostly out of curiosity to see what would happen next, whether they would try to eliminate him or, on the contrary, save him, and how Bagler himself would behave. Parker's vote immediately balances Drakkar's votes with Bagler's, making it 4 each. Bagler votes for Dee (3 votes). Then, votes for Witch start. Saf. Krolek. Drakkar. Weiss (removes from Parker). Enzo. Jaster, with the comment that Drakkar is being saved. Mahasamatman moves his vote from Elenka to Knight. Cactus. And Parker, under pressure, suddenly changes his vote from Drakkar to Knight. In total, the mafia probably distributed the votes anyway, that's one thing. Two, if Drakkar is definitely not the mafia, then Jaster with his comments could be the mafia. But personally, I'm most suspicious of Parker: 1) due to the sudden change of opinion (there were, so to speak, two warring camps, and it's strange to vote for both camps, you either believe in one or the other). 2) because he said that someone had to be hanged (meaning a mafia member). 3) and also because he's playing the "flag" role. If Bagler is not the mafia, then Gudamova is more likely to be the mafia, as she joined the votes against Bagler. Bagler looks like a lone wolf, but Parker is messing things up a bit. If Parker is the mafia, then the Bagler-mafia option is still possible. If Gudamova is the mafia, then Bagler is unlikely to be the mafia. --------------------------------------------------------- I won't comment yet on how accurate I am, the game is still ongoing, but in a separate thread, the votes are monitored quite well; in the general thread, it's possible to sift through it, but it's more difficult. We don't have a separate thread for this on our forum, but it would be convenient.

It would be easier to just post a link to avoid scaring people away even more. Actually, I played games where the voting was done separately. At first, it felt a bit strange, and I kept forgetting to check the adjacent thread, but overall, it was more convenient than what we have now. However, there, people usually voted towards the end of the day, and few changed their votes too often, whereas that's quite possible with us. I just don't remember if there was a separate voting thread for each game or if there was a general one for all of them. I think it was the first option, but that's definitely not what we should implement. As for whether the second option would be convenient, I'm not sure.

At first, it feels unusual; you forget that you also need to check the adjacent thread.

I actually encountered this for the first time, and I missed the voting. I kept waiting for it to start in the game thread, but it never did.

IMHO, it would be nice to create a separate thread for voting. Pin it, and to avoid searching through dozens/hundreds of pages, include links to the relevant factions in the main post, maybe even by day. It would also be very convenient to keep statistics. Everything else is up to the GM; why tie their hands? They can do whatever they want. The main thing is that the players are happy with it. And it wouldn't hurt to try it at least once.

It is quite possible to create a general poll that applies to everyone. In the first post, we could provide links to the beginning of each game and divide the content by days. But I agree with Ment, counting the votes is insignificant compared to creating a newspaper.

But I agree with Ment, counting votes is insignificant compared to the newspaper.

Well, I don't entirely agree. If all your newspapers are as obvious as the ones Shaman had, then in principle, you don't need to do anything; victory will be in the bag. But still, I found about half of the mafia members just by looking at the voting results.

The newspaper is a summary of the night's results. However, there might be issues with calculating them, especially if the match is complex and intricate. And voting is undoubtedly an important aspect. We could try creating a separate thread for all the votes (although I don't see the point in that), and then we'll see how it goes.

If the GM is reasonable, they will create a list, table, or something else to keep track of their NPCs. There have never been any problems with this, or with the narrative part. Only the clues are a hassle, and that's why I don't feel like developing the game.

Clues are also quite a headache. I want to try a new system, link each player to a "mud" from the list and assign clues to it; maybe that will make things easier. At least, it will eliminate the need to think and simply associate clues with a nickname, avatar, or even the registration date.

Hey everyone, is anyone interested in playing this? (Just so you know, I won't be hosting it here.)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vdd_Wct3yU8VSvWooK_kjlDOCwU4Krt2KtQ1oCXviwE/edit

Added 8 minutes later

Clues are also a real headache. I want to try a new system, linking each player to an item from the list and assigning clues to that item. Maybe it will be easier that way. At least, it will eliminate the need to make snap judgments and connect clues to usernames, avatars, or even registration dates.

Kosha, do you know when I started thinking about this? When I quickly figured out a clue that was about me, and 1) realized that the second clue about me would be fatal, 2) I tried my best to connect the clue to someone else, and realized that the profiles are so sparse that it's almost impossible to do. I came up with two versions related to Sesam and OhFF, but they were weak, just enough to confuse the players and make the version about me seem less likely. That's when I thought that clues related to items from the list would offer much more possibilities, both for the GM when creating them and for players when searching, whether they are on the "good" or "bad" side

What’s the situation with the players? I have the impression that many were discouraged by the need to write a quest, as I don’t see any other reasons.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...Q1oCXviwE/edit

I haven’t looked at it yet, so I’m afraid of spoilers.